- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 21:05:12 +0000
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com>
- CC: Yuliya Tikhokhod <tilid@yandex-team.ru>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Dan Scott <dan@coffeecode.net>, "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
The description of http://schema.org/Series seems too narrow: "A TV or radio series." There are currently two subclasses defined: http://schema.org/RadioSeries http://schema.org/TVSeries If the description was relaxed, it seems like "GameSeries" and "PublicationSeries" could be added to the list of subclasses. The latter might then be a reasonable alternative for the proposed "Periodical" class. Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@google.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 4:49 PM > To: Aaron Bradley > Cc: Yuliya Tikhokhod; W3C Web Schemas Task Force; Dan Scott; > Wallis,Richard > Subject: Re: VideoGame proposal > > On 12 June 2014 21:38, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote: > > Revisions look good - I've a couple of further thoughts upon > reviewing > > the proposal again. > > > > 1. Video game series > > > > The proposal lacks any mechanism for declaring a video game to be > part > > of a series. > > Richard Wallis and I met up in London a couple weeks back, and > discussed amongst other things the scope of the periodicals proposal. > > We agreed that it was a bit of a stretch treating a blog as a > periodical, but I wonder whether it might be a reasonable fit here. I > don't think it does feel right, any more than blog, .... but anyway to > recap the proposed definition --- > > https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/Periodicals,_Articles_and_Multi- > volume_Works#New_Type:_Periodical > > "A publication in any medium issued in successive parts bearing > numerical or chronological designations and intended, such as a > magazine, scholarly journal, or newspaper to continue indefinitely." > > Perhaps the analogy here is with books that appear in such series? > this kind of a notion... > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novel_sequence#Contemporary_pressures_and_ > novel_sequences > > As Wikipedia notes, > > "Novel sequences, though, are now most common in genre fiction, > particularly in science fiction and epic fantasy. The introduction of > the preconstructed novel sequence is often attributed to E. E. Doc > Smith, with his Lensman books. Such sequences, from contemporary > authors, tend to be more clearly defined than earlier examples. > Authors are now more likely to announce an overall series title, or > write in round numbers such as 12 volumes. These characteristics are > not those of the classical model forms, and become more like the > 'franchises' of the film industry." > > ... perhaps they could've equally said, "... of the film and game > industries" there? > > Dan > > > I think this is an important concept to address, as many video games > - > > and especially the most popular, mass-market video games - exist as > series. > > Individual video games belonging to that series continue to be > release > > after the introduction of the original title in that series, > sometimes > > spanning decades. > > > > For example, "Battlefield 3" is a video game in the series > "Battlefield". > > Without a distinction between a game and series to which it belong, a > > publisher could declare this to be a VideoGame: > > http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3 > > > > But without a video game series type for: > > http://www.battlefield.com/ > > ... the publisher could only unhelpfully declare this as something > > like WebPage, or ambiguously declare it to be a VideoGame - which it > > is not, because while you can play "Battlefield 3" you can't play > > "Battlefield" (the first game in the franchise was "Battlefield > 1942"). > > > > This is precisely how Freebase handles video games: > > Battlefield 3 = "Video Game" > > Battlefield = "Video Game Series" > > > > So... > > > > ---------- > > > > Suggested added type: > > Thing > Creative Work > Series > VideoGameSeries > > > > Properties from VideoGameSeries > > > > property: videoGame > > Expected type: VideoGame > > Description: A game in a video game series. > > > > ---------- > > > > Suggested added property for: > > Thing > Creative Work > Game > VideoGame > > > > property: partOfSeries > > Expected type: Series > > Description [revision of existing]: The series to which this video > > game, episode or season belongs. > > > > ---------- > > > > Note that it might appear as though the softwareVersion property > could > > be used to declare the specific version of a game, but it cannot for > a > > couple of reasons. > > > > "Battlefield 3" is a video game title in the video game series > > "Battlefield", rather than a softwareVersion of the > > SoftwareApplication "Battlefield". The software in question here is > > "Battlefield 3", which can have its own versions. > > > > As well, video games within a series often have their own names, and > > this additional types and additional properties provide a way of > binding the two. > > > > E.g. > > > > <div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/VideoGame"> > > <h1 itemprop="name">Plants Vs. Zombies Garden Warfare</h1> The latest > > <span itemprop="partOfSeries" itemscope > > itemtype="http://schema.org/VideoGameSeries"><span > > itemprop="name">Plants Vs. Zombies</span></span> game! > > </div> > > > > 2. Video game trailers > > > > As a more specific type of Series, VideoGameSeries would also be able > > to use the series property "trailer". > > > > Video game trailers are among the most consumed and searched-for > media > > associated with video games. While being able to use this for > > VideoGameSeries would be good, it's actually a property far more > > useful for VideoGame itself. Just as TVEpisode has this as a > property > > in addition to TVSeries, so I think it should fall under VideoGame. > > > > ---------- > > > > Suggested added property for: > > Thing > Creative Work > Game > VideoGame > > > > property: trailer > > Expected type: VideoObject > > Description [revision of existing]: The trailer of a movie, video > > game or tv/radio series, season, or episode. > > > > Aaron Bradley > > SEO Analyst, Electronic Arts > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Yuliya Tikhokhod > > <tilid@yandex-team.ru> > > wrote: > >> > >> This is new version of proposal with some minor changes > >> (statistic->characterAttribute) and additional examples > >> > >> 24.05.2014, 01:37, "Jeff Mixter" <jeffmixter@gmail.com>: > >> > >> I think that the changes help a lot. The overall structure seems to > >> be more lightweight and fit within the current schema.org paradigm. > >> It seems like one property that is missing is rating. If we do not > >> want to get embroiled in picking and choosing properties that relate > >> to specific standards, as I think Guha alluded to previously, I > would > >> suggest that you use the existing schema:contentRating property. As > >> is listed in the example, people can then list the rating system as > >> well as the rating for example "ERSB T" > >> > >> I still think it would be interesting to find a lightweight way, > >> using existing schema.org classes and properties, to connect users, > >> the games they play and the servers/services that they use. Again, > I > >> think this can probably be done with the existing schema.org > >> vocabulary so it certainly does not need to be included in any > >> proposal but it might be worthwhile drafting up as a sort of > cookbook for describing video games. > >> > >> Jeff > >> > >> > >> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote: > >> > >> If there is a very wide usage of a particular external standard, > then > >> of course, it makes sense for schema.org to refer to that standard. > >> Note that I say 'wide usage' not 'consensus' (among vocabulary > creators). > >> > >> The cost of bouncing webmasters between different namespaces is just > >> too high. > >> > >> Guha > >> > >> > >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:22 AM, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org > >> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Aaraon: > >> > >> On 15 May 2014, at 21:24, Aaron Bradley <aaranged@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > While I understand the rationale behind using productontology.org > >> > URIs I come down squarely against relying upon them in any > >> > situation where the class and/or properties in question are likely > >> > to be widely used by a large number of webmasters. I feel > >> > confident in saying that potential benefits of employing > >> > productontology.org URIs for something like the proposed platform > property will ever remain potential because hardly anyone will employ > it. > >> > schema.org's better-than-anticipated success has been predicated > >> > not only because it's easy to employ, but on the fact that it's > >> > self-contained. IMO, every time we punt to an external vocabulary > >> > we're shooting ourselves in the > >> > foot: I can't stress this enough (and I welcome Martin Hepp's > >> > input on this, both because I know he's had something to say about > >> > this recently in the context of his generic property/value pair > >> > proposal and, of course, because of his experience with > productontology.org). > >> My point on mechanisms for externalizing or deferring consensus is > as > >> follows: > >> > >> 1. When there exists consensus in an external standard, it is better > >> to refer to that standard than to incorporate it into schema.org - > e.g. > >> currency codes, GPC classes, most enumerations. > >> > >> 2. When site owners are not able to easily link their data to a more > >> standardized representation, it is better to allow them publishing > as > >> much "lightweight" semantics as possible than making it too costly > >> for them to publish any data. > >> > >> Video game is definitely a class that should be in schema.org, > >> whereas for > >> http://www.productontology.org/doc/Action_role-playing_game, I think > an external mechanism is a better place. > >> > >> Martin > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Mixter > >> jeffmixter@gmail.com > >> 440-773-9079 > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Юля Тихоход > >> > >> > > > >
Received on Thursday, 12 June 2014 21:05:45 UTC